Pet Peeve rants.

So it's just doing it from left to right instead of right to left?
Sort of. From what I have seen when Noah is doing homework it's more about place values. You break everything down into hundreds, tens, ones, etc. Now I haven't seen him do multiplication like 365 x 25, but I'd assume you do the same type of thing.

300 x 20 = 6000
60 x 20 = 1200

and so on
 

fade

Staff member
So it's just doing it from left to right instead of right to left?

These people would probably crap themselves if they found out how I mentally do math.

"47 is close to 50, which is easier to multiply. 50 times 3 is 150, minus 3 times 3, which is 9, so 141."

Of course, it's really been years since I had to actually do any arithmetic by hand.
It's not so much the method as the fact that it cements the explanation of what's actually going on when you do the method.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Sort of. From what I have seen when Noah is doing homework it's more about place values. You break everything down into hundreds, tens, ones, etc. Now I haven't seen him do multiplication like 365 x 25, but I'd assume you do the same type of thing.

300 x 20 = 6000
60 x 20 = 1200

and so on
So what do you do when it's something like 367x184 where the second multiplier isn't a simple multiple of 10? What's the order of operations there?
 
These people would probably crap themselves if they found out how I mentally do math.

"47 is close to 50, which is easier to multiply. 50 times 3 is 150, minus 3 times 3, which is 9, so 141."
Ah, the Fermi method.

I guess the idea is that with the old method it was easier to accidentally "black box" the process, meaning that many people would consult their tables to get the answers without ever learning what it really meant. The new method is supposed to reinforce the rationale along with the process, allowing more kids to "get it."

--Patrick
 
300 x 100 = 30000
60 x 100 = 6000
7 x 100 = 700
300 x 80 = 24000
60 x 80 = 4800
7 x 80 = 560
300 x 4 = 1200
60 x 4 = 240
7 x 4 = 28

Add up the products to get: 67528
 
It just seems more complicated. I get that some people don't get how math works and this is breaking it down for them, but it seems redundant to those who do.
 
Oh sure, to people who have more experience with math it seems like a lot of extra steps. i can practically do that in my head (I need to write the product on a piece of paper or I mix up the numbers). For someone in 3rd grade who is just learning to multiply, though, it breaks it down into what they already are familiar with. I look at it like long division. I don't do it anymore, but I learned that first.
 
What is this "Core Math?" Is it really all that different from

Code:
47
x3
----
141
 
 
"Seven times 3 is 21, write down the 1, carry the 2, 4 times 3 is 12, add the carried 2 to get 14, write it down."

?

I can do 47 x 3 in my head without pencil and pad using "core math". 50 x 3 = 150 - (3x3) = 141. boom. Comes in handy in my field when I can just pop off quick math without punching numbers in a calculator. See how kids can understand how sets and multiplication work if they find a core value to multiply by?[DOUBLEPOST=1409362275,1409362180][/DOUBLEPOST]
So what do you do when it's something like 367x184 where the second multiplier isn't a simple multiple of 10? What's the order of operations there?
300 x 100...

oh wait... poptart did it. But yeah... it's actually really cool once you get the hang of it.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I can do 47 x 3 in my head without pencil and pad using "core math". 50 x 3 = 150 - (3x3) = 141. boom.
What you describe is not what was done as "core math," but it exactly mirrors what I described as how I do math in my head - and which PatrThom subsequently dubbed "Fermi math." Core Math, apparently, would have been "40 times 3 is 120, add 7 times 3, which is 21, 141, boom."
 
I had to confirm with Noah that I was doing it right. He says I've got it. Mom's a good student. LOL[DOUBLEPOST=1409363320,1409363115][/DOUBLEPOST]He just asked,"Is there anything else you need me to explain about the algorithm?"
Oy.
 

fade

Staff member
Well sure it's easy and redundant. It's a teaching tool for elementary school kids. It reinforces what the various digits mean and what it means to multiply multi-digit numbers. I have had so many college level students who just don't have the capability to extrapolate mathematics because they only now how to do the math, not why it works. I taught EE and geophysics and this was a huge problem in these mathematical fields.
 
"Fermi problems" usually have more to do with estimation/ballparking than the exact method used by Gas, but I tend to use the term for any problem which can be made easier by "unconventional" means.

--Patrick
 

Dave

Staff member
Listening to my Pandora when Volbeat "Still Counting" comes on. It censored the word "assholes". Seriously? I mean, other songs say fuck and shit, but you censor Volbeat saying asshole?
 
Listening to my Pandora when Volbeat "Still Counting" comes on. It censored the word "assholes". Seriously? I mean, other songs say fuck and shit, but you censor Volbeat saying asshole?
I didn't know Pandora censored its songs. Weird - I guess I haven't noticed this.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I didn't know Pandora censored its songs. Weird - I guess I haven't noticed this.
Speaking as a member of the radio industry-

Generally, at least in broadcast radio, the artists provide their own "censored" or "radio edit" versions on the same CD as the "album version" that they send us, so as to retain some measure of creative control over the work but still anticipate the need for an FCC-friendly version for airplay. So my guess is it was Volbeat themselves who decided to censor "assholes" on their radio edit version, and maybe Pandora used that version instead of the album version for some reason.
 

Dave

Staff member
Speaking as a member of the radio industry-

Generally, at least in broadcast radio, the artists provide their own "censored" or "radio edit" versions on the same CD as the "album version" that they send us, so as to retain some measure of creative control over the work but still anticipate the need for an FCC-friendly version for airplay. So my guess is it was Volbeat themselves who decided to censor "assholes" on their radio edit version, and maybe Pandora used that version instead of the album version for some reason.
As someone who has dealt heavily also with the RPG song list, I know the difference between the released radio edits. But here's the thing: That song is not edited on radio.
 
As someone who has dealt heavily also with the RPG song list, I know the difference between the released radio edits. But here's the thing: That song is not edited on radio.
Surprised they have avoided the "fleeting expletive" thing, then. Even "Money" is censored these days.

--Patrick
 

GasBandit

Staff member
As someone who has dealt heavily also with the RPG song list, I know the difference between the released radio edits. But here's the thing: That song is not edited on radio.
It might also be that (some of) the radio program directors don't think the Album Version is blue enough to merit censorship, while others do, and it could have been somebody's first day on the job at pandora picking what to put where, and now it's easier to just let it roll than go through the work of "fixing" it.

That's generally how things work in broadcasting, I've found. Just about everything is equal parts laziness and incompetence.
 
As someone who has dealt heavily also with the RPG song list, I know the difference between the released radio edits. But here's the thing: That song is not edited on radio.
There's an option in Pandora to censor the songs, since some people play pandora at work or other places where it needs to be more radio-like. You might want to see if that's on.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I don't think I've ever seen somebody else's phone in person who was not at or below 50% battery (I get handed phones to "fix the email" all the time). Drives me nuts. If my own phone gets under 75% I'm looking for a charger with adrenaline in my veins.
 
I don't think I've ever seen somebody else's phone in person who was not at or below 50% battery (I get handed phones to "fix the email" all the time). Drives me nuts. If my own phone gets under 75% I'm looking for a charger with adrenaline in my veins.
I'll bet you shake the crap outta that flashlight, too.

--Patrick
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I'll bet you shake the crap outta that flashlight, too.

--Patrick
The only flashlight I own any more is an android app.

Conversely to my phone, however, I am the guy who swaps/twists/wiggles remote control batteries for years and years.
 
The only flashlight I own any more is an android app.
There was an image macro a while back with a few screenshots from a survival horror movie that showed someone using a flashlight and then obsessively shaking/cranking it to recharge whenever it would get below 90%. Not sure of the game (LIT? Last of us? Alan Wake? Metro?) but you get the idea.

--Patrick
 

figmentPez

Staff member
New pet peeve: People who overuse "bae". I don't care if you're using it as an awful form of "baby" or if it's the acronym for "before all else", not everyone is your bae. The term is potentially annoying enough just because of it's sound, but to tack on insincerity of use? Just shut up already.
 
Top